If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Carry at college satellite campuses?

I'm trying to find an answer to the question of whether a college can restrict carry, open or concealed, at one of their off-campus, satellite locations?

The college restricts weapons, which include firearms, in their student code of conduct. Wording here:

Unauthorized use, possession, or storage of any weapon on UMUC or USM premises or at UMUC- or USM-sponsored activities.

The satellite location at the Quantico Corporate Center is off campus, but the wording of 'premises' puts this into a grey area for me. If they owned the property and building, like a normal campus, I don't believe this would be a grey area for me, but since the building is owned by another, and the space is likely leased, what is the situation here?

This probably falls into a private property category and as such they can make the rules for their property, but after not finding an answer during my searches I'm curious now.

I'm trying to find an answer to the question of whether a college can restrict carry, open or concealed, at one of their off-campus, satellite locations?

The college restricts weapons, which include firearms, in their student code of conduct. Wording here:

The satellite location at the Quantico Corporate Center is off campus, but the wording of 'premises' puts this into a grey area for me. If they owned the property and building, like a normal campus, I don't believe this would be a grey area for me, but since the building is owned by another, and the space is likely leased, what is the situation here?

This probably falls into a private property category and as such they can make the rules for their property, but after not finding an answer during my searches I'm curious now.

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this. Thanks.

The "student code of conduct" only carries weight for those who are actually students - the penalty for violation of the school policy/rule would include expulsion.

The question centers around whether they are a state school or a private (non-state school).

If a state school then gun restrictions would be available through the VAC (Virginia Administrative Code) as they are an Agency of the state - not subject to preemption. The penalty for violation for non-students is trespassing, but is not applicable for areas outside of the buildings where it has been determined to be legal.http://www.nacua.org/documents/DiGia...anuary2011.pdf

Since you do not identify the school in question, no direct answer can be offered.

You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

That's not entirely accurate. Both schools are part of the University System of Maryland, which covers about a dozen different public institutions in the state. They are operated as separate institutions within the same overall system.

That's not entirely accurate. Both schools are part of the University System of Maryland, which covers about a dozen different public institutions in the state. They are operated as separate institutions within the same overall system.

Entirely accurate and cited as such.

They are no more the same than Richmond, Va. is the same as Norfolk, Va.

Last edited by Grapeshot; 08-19-2013 at 01:14 PM.

You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

Think that working through the General Assembly will be more productive with less pain though.

I agree completely!

I imagine a solid case going all the way up would cost in the neighborhood of $20,000.00.
Problem #1 Where to get the money?

Problem number 2 is more important. Taking a case to the Supreme Court effects more than just the appellant. It impacts everyone and a poorly thought out case is not appreciated. It can do a lot of damage.

We were lucky that the amateur antics in the George Mason case didn't cause more harm than it did.

$20,000.00 is nowhere near enough to fund the cost of putting a "test" case through the courts - unless you are counting on a win at the very lowest level. GOA and SAF and JPFO budget at least 5 times that much - even when they get the powerhouse RKBA attorneys to sign on pro bono. They anticipate going to at least the state appealate level in order to get precedent statewide. The philosophy is that there is no future in getting a ruling that applies only to Norfolk (or Ashland, or Surry, or Amelia, or ....) and having to fight the issue again and again until the last political domino falls. Fortunately, most municipalities fall right into that trap and appeal if they lose at the GDC/Circuit Court levels.

Also, look at how Heller 1 & Heller 2, MacDonald, and other cases are set up. The selection of a plaintiff is very precise so that circumstances can fit the question to be asked in order to get the answer desired. We have seen that blow up in our faces before with, for example, local government parks "leased" to private organizations.

stay safe.

"He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

"No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
----Allahpundit

$20,000.00 is nowhere near enough to fund the cost of putting a "test" case through the courts - unless you are counting on a win at the very lowest level. GOA and SAF and JPFO budget at least 5 times that much - even when they get the powerhouse RKBA attorneys to sign on pro bono. They anticipate going to at least the state appealate level in order to get precedent statewide. The philosophy is that there is no future in getting a ruling that applies only to Norfolk (or Ashland, or Surry, or Amelia, or ....) and having to fight the issue again and again until the last political domino falls. Fortunately, most municipalities fall right into that trap and appeal if they lose at the GDC/Circuit Court levels.

Also, look at how Heller 1 & Heller 2, MacDonald, and other cases are set up. The selection of a plaintiff is very precise so that circumstances can fit the question to be asked in order to get the answer desired. We have seen that blow up in our faces before with, for example, local government parks "leased" to private organizations.

Google the Heller case and look for essays and legal-oriented stuff describing the how and why of Dick Heller being the only one of the original plaintiffs that survived to trial. Do the same to study why Otis MacDonald made a good plaintiff while all the others did not. You do not need to be any sort of great legal scholar to understand both the why and the how.

If you need to, come back asking for clarification about some legal or philosophical point you do not understand. The legal gurus - self-proclaiomed and acknowleged - will not be around forever. There is a need for folks to build some of the skills so that when the current gurus are gone the cause will continue to be carried forward.

stay safe.

"He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

"No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
----Allahpundit

Google the Heller case and look for essays and legal-oriented stuff describing the how and why of Dick Heller being the only one of the original plaintiffs that survived to trial. Do the same to study why Otis MacDonald made a good plaintiff while all the others did not. You do not need to be any sort of great legal scholar to understand both the why and the how.

If you need to, come back asking for clarification about some legal or philosophical point you do not understand. The legal gurus - self-proclaiomed and acknowleged - will not be around forever. There is a need for folks to build some of the skills so that when the current gurus are gone the cause will continue to be carried forward.

stay safe.

So I am to understand that Heller was the only one who had "standing" to file suit, as he applied for a permit, but was denied?

If that is the case, shouldn't a student of an institution that prohibits weapons have standing to file suit? Old Dominion University is not exactly the nicest place in town. I actually refuse to take evening classes there, and I don't often participate in extracurricular activities that run past sundown. The one time I went to a party near the campus, a guy was jumped by a group of thugs and they robbed and beat him. I might even be willing to jump through a few hoops just to be able to carry there.

I fear you are looking for an easy answer - a road map that will get you from where we are to where you want to be.

Aren't we all?

Unfortunatelky there is none. The road is twisty, full of slppery slopes, pot holes, and wash outs. The best legal minds in the country have been working on solutions to problems like this for some time.......and still are.

Get involved, stay involved and beat on your legislator's door (nicely of course) - let them know how you feel and why. Stay informed, educate others, campaign for the best representation, and be there when needed. Then just maybe your children or their children will be afforded that which you have been denied.

Could something earth shaking happen tomorrow to right some of these wrongs? Well anything is possible they say, but meanwhile keep the deed to the farm in a safe place - don't bet what you cannot afford to lose.

You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

So I am to understand that Heller was the only one who had "standing" to file suit, as he applied for a permit, but was denied?

Pretty much so. In other words, the others wanted to, but had not taken all of the steps laid out that should have resulted in success.

If that is the case, shouldn't a student of an institution that prohibits weapons have standing to file suit? Old Dominion University is not exactly the nicest place in town. I actually refuse to take evening classes there, and I don't often participate in extracurricular activities that run past sundown. The one time I went to a party near the campus, a guy was jumped by a group of thugs and they robbed and beat him. I might even be willing to jump through a few hoops just to be able to carry there.

Go over the policies and procedures that are supposed to be available here: http://catalog.odu.edu/undergraduate...iesprocedures/ but for some reason are not available on line. Specifically "Firearms, Weapons, and Certain Relared Devices" and "Gun and Weapon Regulation". Go through each and every hoop in the order required. Make all the appeals allowed, in the order specified, to the office(s) specified, within the time limits specified. That is how you gain standing.

Then figure out if ODU would be covered by soverign immunity or qualified immunity when being sued for not following their own policy. Sometimes it is soverign for one set of policies, and qualified for a different set of policies. Go find an attorney who knows how to file a suit against a political entity that is covered by sovereign or qualified immunity and how to get them to agree to be sued in spite of that. Make sure the attorney is suing for the right/proper/appropriate thing(s). Line up your amici and your expert witnesses, figuring out how to get the interested in participating and also figure out how to fund them. Make sure you are still a student* when your case finally comes to trial so that your suit is not mooted for the most basic of technicalities.

Easy-peasy, right?

stay safe.

* - That means still being an undergrad if that is what you were when you started the process, or a grad student if that was what you were enrolled as when you started. (In 250 words or less, explain why.)

"He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

"No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
----Allahpundit

Pretty much so. In other words, the others wanted to, but had not taken all of the steps laid out that should have resulted in success.

Go over the policies and procedures that are supposed to be available here: http://catalog.odu.edu/undergraduate...iesprocedures/ but for some reason are not available on line. Specifically "Firearms, Weapons, and Certain Relared Devices" and "Gun and Weapon Regulation". Go through each and every hoop in the order required. Make all the appeals allowed, in the order specified, to the office(s) specified, within the time limits specified. That is how you gain standing.

Then figure out if ODU would be covered by soverign immunity or qualified immunity when being sued for not following their own policy. Sometimes it is soverign for one set of policies, and qualified for a different set of policies. Go find an attorney who knows how to file a suit against a political entity that is covered by sovereign or qualified immunity and how to get them to agree to be sued in spite of that. Make sure the attorney is suing for the right/proper/appropriate thing(s). Line up your amici and your expert witnesses, figuring out how to get the interested in participating and also figure out how to fund them. Make sure you are still a student* when your case finally comes to trial so that your suit is not mooted for the most basic of technicalities.

Easy-peasy, right?

stay safe.

* - That means still being an undergrad if that is what you were when you started the process, or a grad student if that was what you were enrolled as when you started. (In 250 words or less, explain why.)

I am moot, because I graduate (if I can ever pass economics) in 2015. I don't think two years is enough to get all of this where it needs to be.